Re: prov-aq review for release as working draft (ISSUE-613)

Paul

two editorial comments:

- In 4.2, the text says "according to the following convention" and then example uses &target=.... This suggests that the &target=... is the usual convention that implementations should use. But this is not the case. However, 4.1.1. says that the URI template defines what is used, ie, I can have a service using a different convention, say, &resource=.... I believe this should be made clearer in the text.

- In 4.2 the text says 

"A provenance query service should be capable of returning RDF using the vocabulary defined by [PROV-O], in any standard RDF serialization (e.g. RDF/XML), or any other standard serialization of the Provenance Model specification [PROV-DM]"

In my reading this suggests that a query service should provide _all_ the standard rdf serialisations. Is this what we say? Ie, does the service have to provide rdf/xml, turtle, json-ld, and rdfa? Or should it provide at least one of these? (In which case how does it say which one it can support?)

Mini-mini issues:

- In the status section, bulleted list, the 'PROV-AQ' should not reference to itself.

- A full stop is missing after the item on Target-URI

Finally, we should not forget expanding the /ns/prov files (currently under the 'control' of Tim) to include the terms in this document. This should be done when the document is published.

Cheers

Ivan


On Jan 10, 2013, at 16:13 , Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> PROV-AQ is now ready for review. This should be considered as a "last call" working draft version. 
> 
> You can find the draft to review at:
> 
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/b3f397c7b15c/paq/prov-aq.html
> 
> Tim, Simon, Luc, Dong and Stian agreed to review but all comments are appreciated.
> 
> Questions for reviewers
> - Can this be released as a last call working draft?
> - Is the name provenance access and query appropriate for the document?
> - If not, where are the blocking issues?
> - If yes, are there other issues to work on?
> 
> We particularly encourage reviewers to look at Section 5 Forward provenance as this is a new section.
> 
> In your review please include ISSUE-613
> 
> Thank you,
> Paul and Graham
> 
> -- your friendly prov-aq editors
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
> http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
> Assistant Professor
> - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group | 
>   Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
> - The Network Institute
> VU University Amsterdam


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf